Skip to main content

Week 4 - Han and Yiu

Both papers this week discuss the existence of and the ability to manipulate memory localization in the brain. The 2009 Han et al article seeks to find out if killing the neurons that are activated during a given fear memory erase the memory. It was discovered that when a specific set of neurons in the Lateral Amygdala (LA) that have higher CREB concentrations were killed, the corresponding auditory fear memory was suppressed. Yiu et al’s 2014 article builds off of Han’s research to understand why this happens and to see if this stays true in neurons of different areas of the brain. This team confirms Han’s findings and reveals that the strength of the connection between a neuron and a memory is not necessarily dependent on CREB levels but is dependent on the neuron’s prior excitability. I agree that Han’s study was too minimal and I was left feeling unsatisfied with many questions as to how and why CREB levels affect memory in this way. Yiu not only tackled this question but also tested more areas in the amygdala to confirm this only occurs in the LA and controlled for anxiety levels through the OFT and EPT. 

It interests me how memory is discussed here as such a physical set of connections, although I suppose this is the nature of neuroscience. In most of the research I have read, memory is more of an abstract concept that is measured in terms of behavioral output. This is especially true when it comes to memory localization and different types of memory. This paper seems to take this a step further and pinpoint exactly which neurons carry a specific memory. There would be significant and obvious clinical benefits to this type of research – the identification and removal of fear memory – especially in people with PTSD and perhaps depression and anxiety. However, although the removal of harmful fear memory sounds great, killing any part of the human brain would be dangerous and difficult to do successfully. It would take more research into the role of these neurons and the consequence of removing them before this method could be used therapeutically. Perhaps there is a way to, instead of killing them, alter their excitability or increase inhibition for a certain amount of time. 

These research papers also make me think about the complexity and convoluted nature of memory and how several neurons can be responsible for the trace of many memories at the same time. This is something to keep in mind when killing neurons in live patients – it may affect more than just the one memory. I would be interested in further research on if this phenomenon also occurs with other types of memories, such as happy and sad ones, in other areas of the brain. Perhaps altering the activation of these neurons affects mood and depressive behavior. Even if this is true in rats, I think it would be a long time until this research is clinically applicable in humans.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Week 2- Dopamine Modulation of Depressive-like Behaviors

The Chaudhury et al paper explored the neural circuit mechanisms involved in the dopamine modulation of certain symptoms of depression. In this study, the researchers looked at social interaction and sucrose preference as part of their social-defeat paradigm, which has been shown in the past to be indicative of depressive-like behaviors. Although I initially did not completely see the connection between the social-defeat stress model of depression and the tonic vs phasic firing of dopamine neurons, it seemed that susceptibility and resilience to stress played a role in the functional/behavioral effects of dopamine firing. It was interesting to see how chronic mild stress with phasic firing of VTA dopamine neurons converted even resilient mice into susceptible mice.  The Tye et al paper similarly looked at the dopamine modulation of depressive-like behaviors, focusing on motivation with the forced swim tests and open field tests, followed by measurement of anhedonia by quantifyi...

Sial & Allsop

Sial et al. derived a novel approach for studying what they deem vicarious defeat stress (VSDS) as a model for MDD, PTSD, and other mood-related disorders as an alternative to the classical CSDS paradigm. Using adult male mice, they demonstrate that their model induces a robust and measurable social avoidant phenotype as well as other stress and anxiety related behavioral outputs. Their subsequent rescue study with chronic fluoxetine treatment shows reversal of the behavioral phenotypes and emphasizes the predictive validity of the model. Allsop et al. found that BLA-projecting ACC neurons preferentially encode socially derived aversive cue information by encoding the demonstrator’s distress response during observational learning, hence enabling acquisition of negative valence of cue by BLA neurons and behavioral output. In order to test their hypothesis, Allsop et al. used an observational fear conditional paradigm to create association between a conditioned stimulu...

Buffington and Reber

Buffington et al. explore a mechanism by which maternal obesity can induce neuronal and subsequent behavioral disorders. Using a model of high-fat diet (MHFD)-induced obesity, the authors showcase the strong connection between the brain and the gut, and its impact on behavior. The findings are provocative; by exposing these offspring to the microbiome of control offspring, there was evidence of a rescued observed behavioral phenotype. Furthermore, a phylogenetic profiling of the gut microbiome revealed a decrease in L. reuteri within MHFD offspring, and introduction of live L. reuteri into the drinking water shows successful rescue of the behavioral issues in the MHFD offspring. L. reuteri-induced expression of oxytocin within the paraventricular nuclei of the hypothalamus provides a potential mechanistic explanation for the behavioral changes. I thought this paper provided robust support for the hypothesized interaction between the gut biome and the developing CNS, with tremendous po...